AJR InPractice
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Philpotts, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, C. H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Philpotts, L. E.
Right arrow Articles by Lee, C. H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
AJR 2003; 180:347-351
© American Roentgen Ray Society


Comparison of Automated Versus Vacuum-Assisted Biopsy Methods for Sonographically Guided Core Biopsy of the Breast

Liane E. Philpotts1, Regina J. Hooley and Carol H. Lee

1 All authors: Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, 333 Cedar St., P. O. Box 208042, New Haven, CT 06520.

OBJECTIVE. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcome of sonographically guided core biopsies performed with the 14-gauge automated gun with the outcome of those performed with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device. Outcome was defined in terms of missed tumors, the need (both immediate and delayed) for a second biopsy, histologic underestimation, and complication rates.

MATERIALS AND METHODS. We retrospectively reviewed all sonographically guided core biopsies performed between January 1997 and August 2001. Before February 2000, biopsies were performed using the 14-gauge automated gun and after that time, with either the 14-gauge automated gun or the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device. During the study period, 181 biopsies were performed with the 14-gauge automated gun and 100 with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device.

RESULTS. The histologic results of the core biopsies were similar for the group who underwent biopsy with the 14-gauge automated gun and the group who underwent biopsy with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device: malignant, 19% versus 19%; benign, 78% versus 79%; and high-risk lesion or other, 3% versus 2%, respectively (p > 0.7). Complications were rare and similar for both methods: 2% for the 14-gauge automated gun and 3% for the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device (p = 0.46). A second biopsy was recommended immediately after the first in 14% of the patients who underwent biopsy with the 14-gauge automated gun versus 17% of those who underwent biopsy with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device (p = 0.47). Recommendation for delayed rebiopsy due to interval change occurred in 2.5% of the patients who underwent biopsy with the 14-gauge automated gun method and 3% of those who underwent biopsy with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device (p = 0.94).

CONCLUSION. No significant differences were found in the outcomes of sonographically guided core biopsies performed with the automated gun compared with those performed with the vacuum-assisted device in terms of missed cancers, underestimation, complications, or the need (immediate or delayed) for a second biopsy.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
M. Jang, N. Cho, W. K. Moon, J. S. Park, M. H. Seong, and I. A. Park
Underestimation of Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia at Sonographically Guided Core Biopsy of the Breast
Am. J. Roentgenol., November 1, 2008; 191(5): 1347 - 1351.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J. H. Youk, E.-K. Kim, M. J. Kim, and K. K. Oh
Sonographically Guided 14-Gauge Core Needle Biopsy of Breast Masses: A Review of 2,420 Cases with Long-Term Follow-Up
Am. J. Roentgenol., January 1, 2008; 190(1): 202 - 207.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
J.-M. Lee, J. B. Kaplan, M. P. Murray, L. Bartella, E. A. Morris, S. Joo, D. D. Dershaw, and L. Liberman
Imaging Histologic Discordance at MRI-Guided 9-Gauge Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy
Am. J. Roentgenol., October 1, 2007; 189(4): 852 - 859.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadioGraphicsHome page
J. H. Youk, E.-K. Kim, M. J. Kim, J. Y. Lee, and K. K. Oh
Missed Breast Cancers at US-guided Core Needle Biopsy: How to Reduce Them
RadioGraphics, January 1, 2007; 27(1): 79 - 94.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Ultrasound MedHome page
J. Y. Kwak, E.-K. Kim, H.-L. Park, J.-Y. Kim, and K. K. Oh
Application of the breast imaging reporting and data system final assessment system in sonography of palpable breast lesions and reconsideration of the modified triple test.
J. Ultrasound Med., October 1, 2006; 25(10): 1255 - 1261.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am. J. Roentgenol.Home page
L. Liberman, N. Bracero, E. Morris, C. Thornton, and D. D. Dershaw
MRI-Guided 9-Gauge Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy: Initial Clinical Experience
Am. J. Roentgenol., July 1, 2005; 185(1): 183 - 193.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2003 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.